In last month's post, I mentioned that there are two skills that separate great teachers from good ones. I explained that the first skill is the ability to reframe student behavior, to see it in new ways. Today I want to discuss the second skill: knowing how to treat students fairly by not treating them the same. Allen Mendler and I introduced the idea that fair isn't equal to the education community in 1988 in the first edition of Discipline With Dignity (an updated, more comprehensive explanation with examples is provided in the current edition). Since then, nearly all of the educators who have used our model have seen remarkable results when resolving a wide range of behavior issues. In short, treating students in a fair -- but not equal -- way works.

If you ask students what are the most important qualities they like in teachers, one of the universally top-mentioned is fairness. Teachers and schools strive to be fair and build programs and polices based on this value.

But what is fair? Many define it as treating everyone the same, but I would argue that doing so is the most unfair way to treat students. Students are not the same. They have different motivations for their choices, different needs, different causes for misbehavior and different goals. I think this is good, because wouldn't the world be very boring if we were all the same?

The most glaring example of the misunderstanding between fair and equal is in progressive consequence organization. The first violation results in the same consequence for all; the second infraction, more severe, is still the same for all. This continues throughout the sequence. A vast majority of schools and classes use this model. There is great danger in using progressive consequence schemes. No one would go to a doctor who treats all headaches the same, since the cause for one may be allergies and the other a tumor. Identical treatment for two students who don't do homework for different reasons -- one who has to help at the family business after school, and one who watches too much television -- is no different than that crazy doctor with the single cure for all headaches.

Does treating students fairly take more time? Not nearly as much as unsuccessful solutions to behavior problems that continue to eat classroom time in five-to-fifteen minute chunks over the course of a year.

Here’s how to put this concept into practice.

1. Everyone has the same rules.

Exceptions may be made for unusual circumstances, but positive social interaction is pretty much the same for everyone.

2. Consequences are flexible.

When a rule is violated, the teacher can choose from a large set of possible consequences. These consequences work best when spelled out in advance to students, administrators and parents. There is no defined order or progression. Pick the one that works best or the one you think will be effective from your knowledge of the student. Often it is very effective to give a student a choice from the list along with a promise to improve or the possibility of losing the privilege of choosing.

3. Equal isn't always fair.

Remember that using progressive consequences does not mean that you are treating students the same. How many times a student is run through the progression depends on who is caught and how the consequence is delivered. The following is a highly exaggerated example, but even when a teacher is far subtler, the students pick up on it.

"Johnny, please stop interrupting. This is your warning. Thank you."

As opposed to:

"Bessie, you little weasel. How many times do I have to tell you not to interrupt? I'm really tired of it. You get one more warning before I do something far more serious."

Both students were treated equally because they both got a warning, but was it fair?

With homework, class discussion or in-class activity, ask students for examples from the home, school or society where it is very fair and good to treat people differently. Then give a few examples of how you intend to be fair but not equal. Students K-12 can understand and accept this when explained in a way that matches their capabilities.

5. Follow the basic tenets of great discipline.

Keep communication between you and the student who violated the rule private unless it is impossible to do so.

6. Be willing to discuss your strategy with students.

When students complain that "it’s not fair" if their consequence is different from another student's, remind them that:

Fair isn't equal.

Talking about others is gossip and you won't do it. Add that you will not talk about them to others.

Ask them what would be fair. When they answer, follow with words like, "Okay -- if you can guarantee that when I follow your suggestion, you will stop (or start doing . . .). If your idea works, that will be great, but if it doesn't, then we'll do it my way." This gives students the responsibility to change while understanding what is at stake.

7. Be willing to discuss your strategy with parents.

If a parent complains about unfairness, racism or that you dislike their child, try a conversation that includes the following points:

"I'm really glad you are here. It's great to work with caring parents who have the same goal as me: to help Juan improve."

"I'd like to hear your ideas about this situation. You know Juan better than I do, so tell me what works at home." (This is a great equalizer question.)

"I can see why you might be concerned, but together we can make things better for Juan."

"I’m willing to change my decision to one you think will work better, but if it fails, then let's give my original idea a try."

Here is the best way to conclude the discussion: "I really care about Juan, and I'm willing to do whatever it takes to help him improve his behavior. But there is one thing I will never do, no matter what. I will never treat him like everyone else. Your child deserves a lot better than that."

Being truly fair is harder and requires more work in the short run that just treating everyone the same. In the long run, it saves time and is more effective. And when it comes to treating everyone the same, every child deserves a lot better than that.

I really agree with this-as a teacher of the deaf I always let students know that the signs for fair and equal are not the same. The sign for fair is related to the sign for justice and the sign for equal is related to same. I have used this strategy of natural consequence and restitution with my special education students for 25 years and it has always worked. I am currently teaching the lowest students and even they understand natural consequence and restitution. I very seldom send my students to the Deans office (I teach middle school), I tend to deal with my students with the Administrations support. This takes more work but over time takes less work and increases my parents satisfaction with the fairness of my classroom.

I believe these tips are essential to use in the classroom. Our nation's classrooms consist of diverse students. All students learn differently; therefore, they need different learning supports. Additionally, these tips will help teachers to achieve a student-centered classroom climate. Which tip do you find to be most important? I believe #4: teaching students the differences between fair and equal most important. Teaching students the differences between fair and equal will help to create a respectful class of students who realize that all people learn differently and use differently learning tools. Do you agree?

This article is very insightful. I agree. I have always found progressive discipline systems very frustrating and hard to implement. Consistency is also very difficult. I believe in the argument presented in this post. If you do not mind, I have referenced it in my blogpost about classroom management on my blog: http://reflectionsofeducator.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/to-reward-or-to-pu...
Thank you very much for your perspective.

Equal is not always fair holds true for developing preventive discipline programs as well as for consequences. Rewards and behavior modification programs should also be individualized according to students needs. Often these programs are more effective in reaching goals and modifying behavior than negative consequences. We as teachers need to practice fairess by creating an environment where the unique qualities of students are valued and respected. Then maybe we won't have to "teach" fairness because students will understand and trust that we will do what is best for them because we genuinely care about their best interest. Then they can begin to respect the different needs of others as well.

These are some great tips, especially the pointers on talking with parents at the end. when I was young my parents disciplined my brother and I with a very similar "fair is not equal" philosophy, and it seemed to work well, at least from my perspective.

What I think makes this philosophy potentially problematic in the school setting is that it relies on the teacher to know his or her students well enough to know how to discipline them. I imagine this would be difficult during the first month or two of the school year when teachers and students are still getting to know one another.

I absolutely agree! I've always told students at the beginning of the year, "If you do something wrong, there will be consequences. But what the consequences are will be different depending on the situation." For example, a missing homework assignment, depending on an individual students' circumstances could range from peer tutor help to a phone call to parents.

I never liked automatic suspension for certain "crimes" in elementary school. So I usually handled "weapons crimes" quietly. The kids would tattle that so-and-so "has a knife." I would ask the perp for the knife. They always gave it to me. Then I'd put it in my desk and say, "It's in my desk. Have your parents come to school to get it." No parents ever did, and kid in question never repeated their crime. They also didn't miss any school. I retired with a lifetime supply of knives and letter openers. (OK, I'll admit that consequence was always the same.)

I agree that students will not always be treated exactly the same for various reasons such as the fact that not every student will get caught and because there will be inconsistencies from simple human error. However, I do not agree with the premise that "fair is not equal" and instead believe that educators must strive to achieve equal treatment of students as best as they can. Fair IS equal in most situations--or fair is perceived as equal by most students and parents. Where I think people get on the bandwagon saying that fair really isn't always equal is when we feel the need to treat two different students differently because there are differences in the circumstances. If the circumstances are not the same or similar to begin with then we are already talking about situations that are already not "equal." Responding differently when there are different circumstances may very well be perfectly fair, but this does not mean that fair is not equal.

In #3 above, the contention was made that both students were treated equally because both students were given a warning. However, in the example, they really were NOT treated equally because the WAY each student was given a warning was different--or not at all equal. So, one could say that it was not fair because the methodology was very different.

If a student is tardy because he was messing around and wasting time this is different that if a student was tardy because on the way to school there was an accident that blocked traffic for the bus or a parent. However, if you respond differently to two different students that are tardy and there were no apparent extenuating circumstances, you are setting yourself up for conflict with students and parents and undermining your character and respect if students feel you are acting arbitrary in the way you treat them under similar circumstances. So, fair is equal when you are talking about similar or the same circumstances.

Looking at another example...

If a student wants to turn in work late and the only reason the work is late is because the student simply did not make it a priority, and then you let that student turn the work in late--then you must let every student do the same. However, if you tell that student "no" but let another student that had a death in the family turn in late work, this is fair because of the extenuating circumstances. I think some will say that these examples mean that fair is not equal when in fact, yes, fair is equal. If the other student had a death in the family, you should then also let that student turn work in late. ALL STUDENTS that have a death in the family should then be treated the same and be allowed to turn in late work. Treating students with similar circumstances the same way is what is fair.

Sometimes the circumstances are different and so we make distinctions on how to respond, but this does not mean that fair is not equal.

I just came across your response to my post on fair is not equal. Your point shows that I left out a very important sentence that would clear up our differences of opinion. I should have added that, "Just because you don't have to be equal to be fair, it also doesn't mean that you can't be equal and fair." Being fair means choosing the best intervention for a particular intervention, which I think we agree, but if it the same intervention makes sense because the circumstances are the same, then being fair means doing the same. I think this added sentence, which I thought I included, but didn't, suggests that our positions are the same. It's our semantics that vary.